The Board of Education believes it is essential that it evaluate the Superintendentís performance annually in order to assist both the Board and the Superintendent in the proper discharge of their responsibilities and to enable the Board to provide the County with the best possible leadership.

The Board shall evaluate the performance of its Superintendent in accordance with a process and criteria authorized by State Board of Education Policy 5309 and local policy. The County Board shall not evaluate its Superintendent under a process that has not been approved by the State Board. Once the evaluation policy and evaluation forms are approved by the State Board, the local board cannot amend its policy without approval by the State Board.

The Board and Superintendent shall establish written goals and objectives before September 15th of each year to be used in the evaluation of the Superintendent.

If the Board and the Superintendent are unable to agree on the goals and objectives to be used in the evaluation of the Superintendent, the parties will engage the West Virginia Schools Boards Association and/or the West Virginia Association of School Administrators to facilitate agreement.

The Board is not required to evaluate an interim superintendent serving pursuant to W. Va. Code ß18-4-1.

During any period that the State Board intervenes in the operation of a school system pursuant to W. Va. Code ß18-2E-5, the Board shall not evaluate the Superintendentís performance unless directed by the State Superintendent to do so.

The Board shall annually by June 30th (or by March 1st for a contract set to expire by June 30th of the current school term) evaluate the performance of the Superintendent. Such evaluation shall include an assessment of the:

A.

degree to which the Superintendent has accomplished written goals and/or objectives, the time lines of which may vary, and satisfied other Board/Superintendent-determine measures of effectiveness;

B.

Superintendentís success in improving student achievement generally across the county;

C.

Superintendentís success in improving student achievement specifically through the management and administration of low-performing schools;

The evaluation may also cover the Superintendentís performance in:

A.

community relations,

B.

school finance,

C.

personnel relations,

D.

curriculum standards and programs,

E.

overall leadership of the School District as indicated primarily by improvement in student achievement, testing and assessment;

The Board should consider, during its evaluation, its own effectiveness in providing direction to the Superintendent.

Such assessments will be based on defined quality expectation developed by the Board for each criteria being assessed.

The Board and the Superintendent, jointly shall, determine the method by which the evaluation shall be conducted.

Such method may include evaluation interviews between the Board and Superintendent during which no other business is discussed.

As an outcome of the evaluation of the Superintendentís performance, the Board should be prepared to judge the advisability of retention of the Superintendent and be prepared to:

A.

identify strengths and weaknesses in the operation of the County and determine means by which weaknesses can be reduced and strengths are maintained;

B.

establish specific objectives, the achievement of which will advance the County toward its goals;

C.

improve its own performance as the public body ultimately charged with the educational responsibility of this County.

At the conclusion of the annual evaluation, the Board shall, by the State Board of Education Policy 5309, issue a general statement to the public about the evaluation process and the overall result. The general statement shall be formulated and agreed upon in executive session. It shall be written and may also be read to the public. It should contain nothing more than a description of the process used to perform the evaluation and the result. It should not contain details of the opinions expressed during the evaluation. For example, the statement should indicate that the Board members made their views known with regard to the various aspects as set forth herein above and how they did that. The results should be generally set forth, indicating as to each aspect of the evaluation and overall, how the Superintendent fared. Any resulting action with regard to the Superintendentís contract including length of contract, increases or decreases in salary and/or benefit or other such actions, must be accomplished in open session and not in the executive session herein described. Because of the limited nature of the information permitted to be released in the general statement, the Board members should find it relatively easy to reach a consensus as to the contents of the statement and such consensus must be reached in executive session. However, if no consensus is possible, the contents of the statement may be agreed upon in executive session by a majority of those members who timely completed and submitted the Approved Evaluation Forms and participated in executive session discussion of the Superintendentís performance. No separate or dissenting report of the Superintendentís evaluation shall be released by the Superintendent or any Board member except by mutual consent of the Superintendent and Board. Nor shall the Superintendent or any Board member release or discuss in greater detail than is contained in the general statement any information with regard to the evaluation without the express agreement of the Superintendent and the Board, as agreed to in executive session and memorialized in the minutes of an open session of the Board.